MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Impact of Ovarian Cancer Perceived by Women

2003· article· en· W2023673035 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Nursing · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Support in Illness
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDiseaseQualitative researchOvarian cancerNursing practiceCancerGynecologyFamily medicineGerontologyNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ovarian cancer may be particularly challenging for women, both physically and psychologically, because of the advanced nature of the disease at the time of diagnosis, the side effects of the disease, the repetitive cycles of aggressive therapy, and the perceived loss of femininity from the removal of reproductive organs. In addition, women with this disease rarely have an opportunity for cure. Most will face the very real possibility of dying. This qualitative study examined the perspectives of women living with ovarian cancer. Eighteen women participated in interviews, in which they described their experiences living with the disease. Women reported the myriad day-to-day changes in their lives, the major challenges they had to face, and the sources to which they turned for support. Implications for the practice of oncology nurses involve assessment, an understanding of the profound impact that this illness has on both the woman and her family, and the need to access a variety of supportive care programs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.312
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.343 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it